"Homeless" Looking Officer Watching For Texting Drivers

[SmileDocHill]

No. I DON"T F*** WITH MY PH WHEN I DRIVE!!

I don't want to be the idiot having a accident taking the pic of the idiot playing with her ph. Period. If I'd had a passenger they would have been photographed.

My post was implied purple. I thought it was funny because the process I described had the informant more distracted than the guy being reported.

 

[dusty88]

I am going to step out on a limb here and suggest that laws against [insert activity] while driving are stupid. It is tantamount to saying, "If I can't manage to walk and chew gum at the same time, then it should be illegal for ANYONE to walk and chew gum at the same time." Seriously, all the negative actions attributed to talking, texting, eating, drinking (alcohol or non-alcohol), reading, fussing with children, getting fellated (unfortunately, yes, I have encountered people doing this on the highway), or any other distraction while driving are already punishable acts, much in the same way that I do not believe in any such thing as 'gun crime' since the crimes in question are illegal regardless of the hardware used to perpetrate them. Punish the actual misdeed, not the pre-crime which happens to be the battle cry du jour.

I would also have to ask what harm is being done if a uniformed officer cannot clearly see erratic/dangerous/reckless driving without having an officer pose as a bum to catch people texting WHILE STOPPED AT A LIGHT. I would be much more concerned about their attentiveness WHILE ACTUALLY DRIVING.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to IndyDave1776 again.

 

[dusty88]

This is not a Black and white apples to apples question.

Seriously. I was put in harms way 13 times yesterday by the idiots we are speaking of in a few hours time.
Not one ****ing time was I threatened or made uneasy by a gun owner. Not one ****ing time.
Distracted driving is becoming an epidemic. Far worse than legal gun owners causing havoc/death.
I am very sure that is there was a compilation of accidents from this nation wide on a daily basis put together with no fudging the numbers it would make our heads spin so "No".....not the same thing in the least.

Laws already exist for reckless driving and they should cover this. If LEO see's you swerving, driving erratically then that is reckless driving hands down. Just enforce what is in place and take the damn phone and make them pick it up the next day at the station. Easy peasy.
No more new laws please. No more.

The gun analogy does not play here at least for me.

It isn't the same, but a part of the analogy that holds is what you said: enforce the laws already on the books.

Wreckless driving in its various forms should be addressed rather than something silly like this cop trying to charge people who are STOPPED.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

You think it's hard texting and driving safely? Try surfing INGO while driving...Some of those videos, people post up, last my whole commute to work!

 

[HoughMade]

If u have a smrt phone u can go to main menu, camera, take pic. Then go to messaging, attach pic, select pic from photo library and "ok". Then send. (Sorry about abbreviations and punctuation, I'm driving) Then the authorities have the evidence they need to get them later. Don't wait till later, real time evidence is best and you'll be satisfied knowing you made the road a safer place. This can all be done while driving.

Shoulda seen me the other day using my iPad to take a pic of a tanker that had on the back of the tank: "Not intended for human food. Pork blood only".

No texting, though. That's dangerous.

 

[SMiller]

You think it's hard texting and driving safely? Try surfing INGO while driving...Some of those videos, people post up, last my whole commute to work!

Word!

As a tax payer I would not be happy to be paying a officers salary only to see home dressed as a homeless guy enforcing cell phones...

 

[BE Mike]

Shoulda seen me the other day using my iPad to take a pic of a tanker that had on the back of the tank: "Not intended for human food. Pork blood only".

No texting, though. That's dangerous.

Was that tanker part of the new treaty with Iran? It would be, if I were king. People have no idea how dangerous they drive while distracted or they simply don't care. Many folks don't even drive well while totally committed to the task.

 

[gummergif]

Man, they should really pay officers enough that they can at least afford an apartment.

Maybe his ex-wife is just reeeeealy taking him to town on alimony.

 

[Dead Duck]

Man, they should really pay officers enough that they can at least afford an apartment.

Maybe his ex-wife is just reeeeealy taking him to town on alimony.

You're right.

Someone should at least pull over and give that bum a donut.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Distracted driving is the new DUI. With all the pot heads, tweakers, drunks and cell phone users on the road, it is a scarier place than ever. It seems like rear end collisions are happening at a brisker pace than before. Many people cannot control their behavior with this technology. It is as addicting for some people as drugs. It will take new technology by the police to fight the abuse.

How about we just skip the new technology/spying and simply address dangerous actions expressed in unsafe operation of the vehicle, you know, like swerving, unsafe lane changes, cutting in on the front bumper of a faster vehicle in another lane and standing on the brakes like the dumbass on 70 this evening--things that are dangerous and readily visible without having to peek in windows and try to identify pre-crimes.

 

[1775usmarine]

I say let natural selection run its course.

 

[BiscuitNaBasket]

There's a first time for everything. Today, in greenwood, I was making my way east on edgewood ave. I was behind a sedan that seemed to have trouble keeping a consistent speed. It wasn't until we got to a four way stop that I knew exactly why. He stopped, didn't look in either direction, stared down, and sat there for ten seconds before I had enough and blew the horn. He threw his hands up with the cell phone in one of them. I just shook my head.

 

[Gluemanz28]

Just a thought here, but if the drivers weren't distracted they would be able to read the sign that Officer Homeless was holding.

 

[KLB]

Just a thought here, but if the drivers weren't distracted they would be able to read the sign that Officer Homeless was holding.

I wouldn't have read that sign if I was driving, unless possibly if I was stopped in traffic. Too small and not relevant to driving.

 

[Gluemanz28]

I wouldn't have read that sign if I was driving, unless possibly if I was stopped in traffic. Too small and not relevant to driving.

If you can't read that sign I suggest you do some relevant driving to the closest optometrist.

The article did state that the officer was looking at stopped drivers.

 

[IndyDave1776]

If you can't read that sign I suggest you do some relevant driving to the closest optometrist.

The article did state that the officer was looking at stopped drivers.

Wait a minute. The sign is not all that large, has relatively small print in fine lines, and as you drive by, or even sit stopped, it is not going to be so easy to read as it is in a photo taken from a preplanned position for dramatic effect.

 

[Gluemanz28]

Wait a minute. The sign is not all that large, has relatively small print in fine lines, and as you drive by, or even sit stopped, it is not going to be so easy to read as it is in a photo taken from a preplanned position for dramatic effect.

Are you kidding me???? That sign is every bit of three feet wide. I am on the road every day visiting customers and I have never seen an actual pan handler with a sign that large. That alone would have made me look. Most signs are about 12"x12" laminated with shipping tape that fold in half to be easily stored under the seat of their car parked close by.

 

[dusty88]

Just a thought here, but if the drivers weren't distracted they would be able to read the sign that Officer Homeless was holding.

That's ironic, because reading a sign would be getting "distracted" from driving now, wouldn't it?



The part of this that's kind of disturbing though is that anyone would think this is a good idea to entrap drivers who are at a stoplight. That's not about safety; that's about an opportunity for prosecution. It's also an example of government treating good people like an enemy instead of looking out for their safety.

 

[Gluemanz28]

That's ironic, because reading a sign would be getting "distracted" from driving now, wouldn't it?



The part of this that's kind of disturbing though is that anyone would think this is a good idea to entrap drivers who are at a stoplight. That's not about safety; that's about an opportunity for prosecution. It's also an example of government treating good people like an enemy instead of looking out for their safety.

Eyes forward looking through the windows is no more distracted then looking at road signs. Looking down at your phone is not the same thing.

I never said it was a good idea, just surprised that with the sign people still got popped. MD is a state where I wouldn't live. A friend of mine was a MST for 15 years and even he can't get a LTCH.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Are you kidding me???? That sign is every bit of three feet wide. I am on the road every day visiting customers and I have never seen an actual pan handler with a sign that large. That alone would have made me look. Most signs are about 12"x12" laminated with shipping tape that fold in half to be easily stored under the seat of their car parked close by.

OK, it is wider than average. That does not negate the facts that it appears to have been written with a Sharpie and would not be easy to read unless you stopped to afford it your undivided attention while stationary. Then, you have to consider how much attention most people will afford a bum. Generally, I wouldn't notice if one were holding a sign that said, "I buried Jimmy Hoffa on the moon" much less any more conventional message like the ubiquitous 'will work for food'.